Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

[_why me]

If you accept section 132 as the true word of God, then, as TD has stated, God becomes one sick SOB.

Which is the #1 reason to feel quite comfortable saying God had nothing to do with Sec 132.

I am glad that you feel comfortable. But let us look at it this way: You are Emma and you are more or less in on the fraud. After all, Emma was there when Joseph Smith was translating the book. She felt the plates under the cloth. If anyone would know that Joseph Smith was a fraud it would be her. And so, there is your husband being sealed to other women, engaging in the plurality of wives and you do not like it. Right?

Suddenly your husband comes to you with section 132, what do you do? I do believe that you take that section and rip it, burn it and throw the Book of Mormon at him and say, enough is enough and come clean about the fraud. And of course if you were Joseph Smith why would you even consider 132 knowing that you were a fraud? Isn't it strange that he would even consider it? He must have been crazy. However, if he were a prophet section 132 would make sense.

It should be clear that if anyone consider him to be a prophet it was emma. If anyone knew the Book of Mormon were a fraud, it would be emma. But it does seem that Emma considered him a prophet but she was torn about polygamy. She just could not get her mind around it. Thus, section 132. And according to Bushman the children were brought up believing in the Bible and in the Book of Mormon. Can you explain all this?

[_truth dancer]

Hi Why Me,

You are Emma and you are more or less in on the fraud. After all, Emma was there when Joseph Smith was translating the book. She felt the plates under the cloth. If anyone would know that Joseph Smith was a fraud it would be her.

I'm not exactly sure what was going through Emma's mind. I'm guessing she is like many women who want to preserve their marriages.

And so, there is your husband being sealed to other women, engaging in the plurality of wives and you do not like it. Right?

She didn't Joseph's affair with Fanny. What woman is happy to find her husband in the barn with a sixteen year old? (Check out Harmony's tag line).

Remember Joseph wasn't exactly forthcoming with Emma.

Suddenly your husband comes to you with section 132, what do you do? I do believe that you take that section and rip it, burn it and throw the Book of Mormon at him and say, enough is enough and come clean about the fraud. And of course if you were Joseph Smith why would you even consider 132 knowing that you were a fraud?

Are you kidding?

Cult and religious leaders/prophets/Gurus are notorious for gathering girls and women for their sexual use. Joseph Smith is not the exception he is the rule. What would be more unlikely is for a very powerful religious leader to remain faithful, honor his marriage, love his wife.

Isn't it strange that he would even consider it? He must have been crazy.

No, he would have been like numerous other powerful religious and cult leaders and taken advantage of his power to screw girls and women. Come up Why Me, this isn't rocket science here.

However, if he were a prophet section 132 would make sense.

No, if he were really a prophet of God, he would have lived in accord with Jesus Christ and treated Emma as he would like to be treated, been honest in his dealings with his followers, not broken the hearts of the daughters of God, lived in truth, listened to Christ's command to cleave unto his wife AND NONE OTHER. You know, the basic teachings of goodness and kindness and decency.

It should be clear that if anyone consider him to be a prophet it was emma.

Not clear at all. And doesn't matter one way or the other. Lots of people excuse the sexual infidelities of their leader.

Can you explain all this?

Easily. Joseph Smith, like many other cult and religious leaders used his power and authority to sexually use girls and women.

Not too difficult.

The question really is, why do devotees and followers of various cult and religious leaders give their personal leader a free pass to behave in all sorts of cruel, indecent, immoral, and malicious behavior but condemn others who behave in similar ways?

[_why me]

Unfortunately, TD, you didn't addresss my main point: section 132 and emma. As I said, if emma Joseph Smith was a fraud, why would Joseph Smith present her with 132? This is what doesn't make sense. Emma was an astute woman. During the early years when she watched Joseph Smith bury his head in a hat, she seemed a believer. But lets just say for the sake of argument that she Joseph was not a prophet, that the whole thing was a hoax. Why would Joseph Smith present her with section 132 and expect to get away with it?

Of course the anwer is rather simple: Emma believed her husband to be a prophet and she believed in the Book of Mormon. She was convinced that the Book of Mormon was what it claimed to be. But she couldn't get her head around polygamy. But she never claimed that her husband was a fraud when he presented her with section 132. In fact, I have no idea how she reacted to that section.

Section 132 is controversial for some women critics. But was it controversial for Emma? But it is good that women like yourself defend the women who don't need to be defended. They are dead and cannot speak for themselves. But something tells me that if they were alive they would not sympathize with your posts.

Joseph Smith believed that plural marriage was from god and he went about it with gusto the last two years of his life. He was not an enthusiastic polygamist.

[_truth dancer]

Hey Why Me,

Unfortunately, TD, you didn't addresss my main point: section 132 and emma. As I said, if emma Joseph Smith was a fraud, why would Joseph Smith present her with 132?

Like other powerful male religious and cult leaders Joseph presented his "revelations" for his own purposes and tried to convince others he was acting in the name of God. Nothing new here.

There are plenty of women who attach themselves to powerful male leaders, some who believe their leader is a prophet or incarnation of God, other who feel called themselves to be the womb through which God will manifest himself. I'm not sure what this has to do with Joseph Smith? I'm can't read Emma's mind but if I had to guess I think she tried to manage the best she could, just like other women who find themselves in really difficult situations; humans are pretty good at surviving and if it means denying, rationalizing, or justifying certain behavior, well it can be done.

Joseph Smith got himself in a pickle... he was caught having an affair with a sixteen year old girl and had to find a way to justify it while maintaining his power. Didn't much matter if Emma believed his "revelation" or not, many followers did, as is a common practice when followers discover some sort of nastiness in their leader. Personally, I don't think Emma believed it for a second.

This is what doesn't make sense. Emma was an astute woman. During the early years when she watched Joseph Smith bury his head in a hat, she seemed a believer.

Maybe, or maybe she just didn't know what was going on? Maybe she was determined to make her marriage happy? Maybe she was too tired and sad from multiple children dying? Maybe she was exhausted and depressed from hoping Joseph Smith would get his act together? Maybe she tried to deal with the situation as best she could and while supportive at first, felt Joseph Smith went too far? Again, I'm not sure why this really matters.

But lets just say for the sake of argument that she Joseph was not a prophet, that the whole thing was a hoax. Why would Joseph Smith present her with section 132 and expect to get away with it?

OK, listen up!

Whether Emma believed Joseph Smith or not is irrelevant!

Joseph Smith was trying his best to find a way to make his affair with Fanny acceptable. He gets caught in the barn with his children's nanny or housekeeper and Emma is angry, his friends tell him to stop the dirty nasty affair.

What could he say to justify it? Yeah I am a horny toad (smile), or yeah I just couldn't help myself, or yeah, I am not really a prophet? Or.... maybe since he was pretty good at lying and deceiving and doing the prophet thing, he went with the only thing that could keep him in his powerful position, the one thing that would allow him full access to whatever girls and women he wanted? Hmmmm.. yep! The "God said" excuse! Worked well for him. "Sorry Emma, God told me to have all these affai... I mean marriages. I didn't want to but God commanded me to."

Of course the anwer is rather simple: Emma believed her husband to be a prophet and she believed in the Book of Mormon. She was convinced that the Book of Mormon was what it claimed to be. But she couldn't get her head around polygamy. But she never claimed that her husband was a fraud when he presented her with section 132. In fact, I have no idea how she reacted to that section.

I can't read Emma's mind. What I do know is that women find ways to manage difficult situations and many women remain in seriously horrific, even abusive marriages. Again, I don't think it much matters what Emma thought. We know Joseph Smith didn't care a hoot what she thought. He knew he was "breaking the heart" of his wife and, well pretty much couldn't care less.

Section 132 is controversial for some women critics.

And some men. All men are not made of similar character as was Joseph Smith. There are plenty of men who love their wives, who care for them, who don't want a harem, and who take their marriages seriously. There are men who find the behavior of Joseph Smith despicable to say the least.

But was it controversial for Emma? But it is good that women like yourself defend the women who don't need to be defended. They are dead and cannot speak for themselves. But something tells me that if they were alive they would not sympathize with your posts.

I don't know that I defend the girls and women who were involved in polygamy. What I do speak out against is the enslavement of girls and women, the lies, deception, and manipulation of girls and women by powerful men for their sexual purposes.

I have had discussions with women involved in polygamy and all I will say about it is the women I spoke with, while showing a good face to the public, in the quiet of their souls are heartbroken, just like God said in the Book of Mormon. Sharing ones husband, living a harem lifestyle is considered an "Abrahamic sacrifice"; basically they are giving up their lives and happiness for an eternal reward. As sorrowful and distraught as they are they will defend the "principle."

In my extended family there is polygamy. One of the saddest stories I have ever come across is from the journal of a wife who literally died of a broken heart. From the day her husband told her he was to take another wife, a depression came that, try as she did to embrace the principle brought her death. This woman was not alone... her story is the story of many, many women.

Joseph Smith believed that plural marriage was from god and he went about it with gusto the last two years of his life. He was not an enthusiastic polygamist.

As I have stated, most devotees and followers of powerful religious and cult leaders who use their power for sexual advantage, believe their leader and make whatever sorts of accomodations they need to to justify their cruel, indecent, and outrageous behavior.

I think Joseph Smith had a serious mental health issue and may have convinced himself that his sexual needs and tendencies and urges were from God. In other words, the way he justified his lack of care and decency was to convince himself he really was hearing God.

But no, I don't think God would possibly be at the helm of such behavior.

Again, I don't like the idea of men blaming God for their cruelty and misguided behavior.

~td~

[_Dr. Shades]

Joseph Smith believed that plural marriage was from god and he went about it with gusto the last two years of his life. He was not an enthusiastic polygamist.

Didn't you just contradict yourself?

[_Gadianton Plumber]

I admit that I know very little about this, but didn't Emma do anything but accept the commandment? Didn't she spend the rest of her life denying it ever happened?

[Guest]

TD, You are still not getting it. Emma knew Joseph very well. She was there from the very beginning. She felt the plates, saw the translation process. Attempted to hide the plates from curious onlookers etc. Either she believed he was a prophet or she was in on the fraud. My guess is that she believed that he was a prophet and believed until the end. But she did not understand polygamy and thus section 132. I do not see how Joseph Smith could have fooled his wife in the beginning. As Emma said, she never saw a manuscript.

This leaves a hole in your understanding as with many other critics when dealing with plural wives and section 132. Now if Emma would have met Joseph Smith in 1835, then yes, I could see your understanding. But there is no way that Joseph could have fooled his wife about the Book of Mormon. She would have saw through it immediately. And section 132? It was a revelation she could not accept but she loved her man.

[_why me]

Joseph Smith believed that plural marriage was from god and he went about it with gusto the last two years of his life. He was not an enthusiastic polygamist.

Didn't you just contradict yourself?

No, as I wrote earlier, he was a man in a hurry. I have this feeling or perhaps I read it somewhere, that he needed to make up for lost time. God commanded plural marriage and he dragged his feet. Thus the last two years of his life, he went on a plural marriage frenzy. It wasn't horny toadism but a feeling that he needed to get on with it---the drawn sword did the trick.

[_huckelberry]

Why me brings up the proposal that critics should not complain about polygamay because some women who are no longer alive to defend themselves believed and accepted it. I remember several people seized on that position on Zlmb before stomping off to the mad board. There was a review of the reasons monogamy is dragging the world into sin and polygamy is salvation. That at least is an argument.

Critics are defending the also deceased women who rejected polygamy such as Joseph Smiths real wife who denied he ever taught such things.

I do not see any reason to think Emma knew if Joseph was speaking for God or not. Touching some sort of metal feeling plates under a cloth is going to produce a maybe maybe not at best. That may be what she thought. She certainly wasn't convinced by dc132.

As a male reader I find the spirit of 132 to be malignant. I observed it encouraging atheism through the distortion of Gods charater it presents.

[_truth dancer]

TD, You are still not getting it.

I am trying. :-)

Emma knew Joseph very well.

Yes, I agree!

She was there from the very beginning. She felt the plates, saw the translation process. Attempted to hide the plates from curious onlookers etc. Either she believed he was a prophet or she was in on the fraud.

I don't think it is nearly so black and white. She may have wondered, hoped, tried to believe, thought it likely, thought it unlikely, considered it a possibility, questioned it completely, didn't care but wanted to protect her husband, wanted it all to end but couldn't figure out how to do this, hated it enormously but felt it her duty to support her husband, or any combination of the above.

My guess is that she believed that he was a prophet and believed until the end.

Any proof or even evidence for this? I disagree completely.

But she did not understand polygamy and thus section 132. I do not see how Joseph Smith could have fooled his wife in the beginning. As Emma said, she never saw a manuscript.

OK, to help you understand, think of every other person who lies to his/her spouse for some reason. Con men are notoriously good at fooling others. It happens ALL the time. And, devotees are notorious for only seeing what they want to see. Similarly, wives may deny or dismiss bad behavior in their husbands for the greater good of family.

This leaves a hole in your understanding as with many other critics when dealing with plural wives and section 132.

I truly do not see a hole.

Now if Emma would have met Joseph Smith in 1835, then yes, I could see your understanding. But there is no way that Joseph could have fooled his wife about the Book of Mormon.

Of course he could have. Again, con men fool people ALL THE TIME. She may have been wondering, hoping, thinking it possible, considering it, questioning it, doubting the claims, or even totally sure he was lying but didn't know what to do with it all, then finally realized Joseph Smith was full of it when he tried to claim God told him to have an affair with a sixteen year old girl.

She would have saw through it immediately. And section 132? It was a revelation she could not accept but she loved her man.

Who knows? Many women remain in horrible, even abusive situations for all sorts of reasons. Many women remain in marriages without loving their husbands. Many women try to find a way to cope with a truly horrific situation. I don't think Emma was much different than most other women whose husbands turn out to be less than loyal, decent, and loving.

~td~